All posts by Staff

Cost of Bourbon County Employee Benefits in 2024

The cost of employee benefits in 2024 for Bourbon County has come up frequently in recent discussions about the county budget. Generally, the number has been given at around $4,000,000 for about 100 employees.

In paperwork from the county, the actual amount budgeted for 2024 was $4,379,580, but the amount actually spent in 2024 was $3,942,848.

While those numbers are correct in the sense that they represent the amount that shows up on the accounting document, the roughly $4 million amount includes money that is deducted from the employee’s paycheck for various benefits. For example, if an employee’s family is being covered by county health insurance, the employee is responsible for a portion of those premiums, but the amount the employee reimburses still shows up as outflow under the Health line item.

In 2024, $1,490,497.44 was deposited into the employee benefits account as “Reimbursed Expenditure” from employee salary deductions, which covered employee contributions for benefits. These deductions include various types of insurance that the employee can choose to pay for, as well as money funding health savings accounts or flexible spending arrangements.

So to get a better idea of how much of the money being payed out in employee benefits is actually being paid by the county and not the employees, the amount that is being paid by employee payroll deductions needs to be subtracted from the amount flowing out of that account. The total employee benefit expenditures minus the amount reimbursed via payroll deductions come to $2,452,351.46.

With approximately 100 employees, this would bring the average spent per person on county employee benefits closer to the $24,000 range, rather than the $40,000 range, as it might appear at first glance.

USD234 Hearing Notice and Proposed Budget for 2025-2026

Update: It appears that the dates published in the notice that was mailed to residents and the USD 234 public hearings will be on 9/11/2024 at 5:30 at 424 S Main. The USD 234 Recreation (Buck Run) will be at 9/3/2025 at 12 PM at Buck Run Community Center.

According to Terry Mayfield, Assistant Superintendent at USD234, the public hearing regarding the district’s proposal to exceed the revenue-neutral rate will be held on September 8th, 2025, at 5:30 & 5:45 p.m. at 424 S. Main, Fort Scott, KS 66701. The county’s Notice of Proposed Property Tax Increase and Public Hearing mailing, which was previously mailed to county residents, had listed the hearing dates as September 3rd and September 11th.

According to the notice, “Detailed budget information, including budget profile, building needs assessment and Board state assessments review is available at the District Office on the district website and will be available at this hearing.”

See the attached PDF for the proposed budget amounts:
USD 234 Hearing Notices 2025-2026

 

Historical Cost of Education per Student at USD234

In 1977, USD234’s budget was discussed in the Tribune. The story lists the district’s budget as $2,332,642 and the number of students as 2112 for the year, which gives a cost per student of $1,104.47.

This historical cost per student is now part of the data that school districts submit to the state, but the district no longer has (or can’t easily obtain) records before 2002.

The most recent cost per student at USD234 was $19,110 in 2024. This was down just slightly from the $19,235 cost per student in 2023. While $19,110 is $18,006 more than what each student cost in 1977, inflation accounts for a portion of that increase.

In 1977, the average annual wage in the United States was $9,779.44, and a new car could be purchased for $3,000 to $6,000. To obtain a fair comparison, one needs to graph the growth of spending against the amount of the 1977 cost per student, adjusted for inflation, each year. While no data was available from 1978 to 2001, those amounts have been represented as an even increase between the 1977 amount and the amount in 2001. The actual cost per student between those years may not be individually accurate, but the growth rate will be correct. Inflation numbers come from BLS.gov.

There may be some minor discrepancies due to school years not aligning with the Jan to Dec, inflation numbers used in the calculation, but those issues will average out over longer periods of time.

According to the data, if USD234 spent the same amount as they did in 1977, while increasing it as needed to keep up with inflation, the expected cost per student would $5,882 in 2024.  Instead, the cost per student is $19,110, representing an increase of $13,288, or 228% more than what can be explained by inflation. For context, if the average wage of $9,779.44 had grown by the same amount, the average wage would now be $169,207. (In 2023, the average wage in the US was $66,621)

Obviously, inflation isn’t the only thing that drives up the cost of education, but it is a critical component and essential to factor in when comparing the current costs to historical.

Below is a chart of the data. Italicized numbers were not available from the school district and are extrapolated from the overall growth rate.

USD234 Historical Cost Per Student Inflation Adjusted from 1977 baseline
1977 $1,104.47 $1,104.47
1978 $1,341.37 $1,179.99
1979 $1,578.27 $1,289.49
1980 $1,815.17 $1,468.85
1981 $2,052.07 $1,642.55
1982 $2,288.98 $1,780.37
1983 $2,525.88 $1,846.45
1984 $2,762.78 $1,923.85
1985 $2,999.68 $1,991.82
1986 $3,236.58 $2,069.23
1987 $3,473.48 $2,099.43
1988 $3,710.38 $2,184.40
1989 $3,947.28 $2,286.35
1990 $4,184.19 $2,405.29
1991 $4,421.09 $2,541.22
1992 $4,657.99 $2,607.30
1993 $4,894.89 $2,692.26
1994 $5,131.79 $2,760.23
1995 $5,368.69 $2,837.63
1996 $5,605.59 $2,915.05
1997 $5,842.49 $3,003.78
1998 $6,079.40 $3,050.98
1999 $6,316.30 $3,101.95
2000 $6,553.20 $3,186.92
2001 $6,790.10 $3,305.86
2002 $7,027.00 $3,343.62
2003 $7,288.00 $3,430.46
2004 $7,356.00 $3,496.55
2005 $7,950.00 $3,600.38
2006 $8,751.00 $3,743.87
2007 $9,444.00 $3,821.58
2008 $10,014.00 $3,985.16
2009 $10,042.00 $3,986.35
2010 $10,275.00 $4,091.01
2011 $9,863.00 $4,146.21
2012 $10,142.00 $4,279.39
2013 $10,548.00 $4,347.64
2014 $10,529.00 $4,416.29
2015 $10,962.00 $4,412.35
2016 $12,111.00 $4,472.94
2017 $11,608.00 $4,584.76
2018 $12,353.00 $4,679.69
2019 $12,652.00 $4,752.28
2020 $14,094.00 $4,870.45
2021 $15,383.00 $4,938.62
2022 $15,453.00 $5,308.02
2023 $19,235.00 $5,648.28
2024 $19,110.00 $5,822.86

Key summary points from 8/11/2025 County Commission meeting

Key points from 8/11/2025 Commission Meeting with links to that section of the video recording.


  • 07:35 Brad Matkin from the City of Fort Scott requested the county produce asphalt for the city at $65 per ton, requiring approximately 2,000 tons this year, which would save the city about $35 per ton plus travel costs compared to other sources.
  • 18:17 The commission discussed canceling the IT support Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Fort Scott as they had hired their own IT support, with Commissioner Milburn moving to cancel the agreement effective immediately.
  • 20:47 Bob Guilfoyle from Crawl Can Internet presented two internet service proposals: maintaining the current network at a reduced rate of $1,100/month (down from $1,400) or separating the Sheriff’s Department onto its own network for $1,220/month total, which would provide better security and redundancy.
  • 01:02:17 Justin from Crawl Can explained the difference between hosted and on-site phone systems, noting that hosted systems cost about $30/month per phone (with 125 county phones currently) and require each phone to have its own number, while on-site systems have a one-time purchase cost with some recurring software fees.
  • 01:07:49 The commission tabled the internet service decision until August 25th to allow Commissioner Tran to consult with a technical expert and gather more information about the total costs involved.
  • 01:52:17 Susan Walker, County Clerk, presented information about upcoming election deadlines, including October 14th as the voter registration deadline, October 15th for mailing advance ballots, October 20th for early voting at the courthouse, and November 4th as the general election date.
  • 02:06:50 Matt, the County Appraiser, reported that Bourbon County is in compliance with state valuation requirements but still approximately 18% below the ideal valuation ratio of 90–110%, with residential properties and farm home sites showing the largest increases in value.
  • 02:19:34 Commissioner Tran presented data showing that 20.8% of Bourbon County households pay less than $800 annually in property taxes, 19.2% pay between $800–$1,499, and 18.5% pay $3,000 or more, with the median home value at $95,600 and median tax bill at $1,694.
  • 03:14:58 The commission voted to move forward with Emerson and Company for payroll services, with the understanding they would work with the County Clerk’s office during the transition period.
  • 03:17:03 Commissioner Milburn reported on discussions with the driver’s license office and sixth judicial district about relocating them from their current building, with the driver’s license office potentially moving to the courthouse and the judicial district to the former health center trailer.
  • 03:29:59 The commission discussed repealing Resolution 1425 to remove the Budget Payroll Benefits Officer ($10,000), Road Records Officer ($5,000), and Chief Operations Officer ($88,616.84) positions from the county’s organizational structure.
  • 03:39:11 The commission scheduled a special meeting with insurance broker Don Doherty for August 22nd at 5:00 PM to learn more about the county’s insurance plans.
  • 03:41:22 Commissioner Tran emphasized the importance of reaching consensus on maintaining the current mill levy before determining budget priorities, stressing the need to take care of county services while maintaining professionalism throughout the budget process.
  • 03:43:17 Commissioner Milburn announced that the tax sale list was sent to the law firm on August 8, 2025, and emphasized that property valuations are market-based, with the commission only directly raising taxes when they increase the mill levy or choose not to lower it when valuations increase.

Bourbon County Employee Health Plans

The following graphic shows the breakdown of the employee and employer amounts paid for health insurance for employees of Bourbon County.   According to the chart, a county employee with full healthcare coverage for themselves will be paid 100% by the county. The county’s cost for these plans is $820.11 or $902.35, depending on whether the employee chooses the high deductible plan with a Health Savings Account or a lower deductible one with a Flexible Spending Account.

An employee who wants to put their entire family on the county’s high deductible plan will have to pay $420.80 for their portion and the county will kick in $2,181.06 to pay the rest of the premium. This represents an additional $1,360.95 of county contribution for family coverage over what the county pays to cover just the employee.

August 4th Bourbon County Commission Meeting Summary and Video Links

 

  • Dr. Steve Cohen outlined his plan to develop a policy manual, job descriptions, performance appraisal process, and wage and salary structure over the next 6–8 months, with each element taking approximately 6–8 weeks to complete. ↗️ 11:11

  • Dr. Cohen recommended using an outside payroll firm to provide stability regardless of personnel changes, noting it would take a minimum of 90 days to implement and would require commission approval for expenses over $1,000. ↗️ 14:00

  • Laura Holdridge, Register of Deeds, requested changing the Christmas holiday schedule to give employees December 25–26 off instead of December 24–25, as Christmas falls on a Thursday and many employees would take vacation on Friday anyway. ↗️ 20:22

  • Holdridge requested $18,500 be returned to her tech fund, stating she contributed this amount but is not receiving adequate IT services, which led to discussion about network security concerns if her department were to operate independently. ↗️ 25:45

  • Eric Bailey announced that Dustin Hall rescinded his resignation and would return to his position at Public Works, and Bailey confirmed he would continue mentoring Hall until Bailey’s departure. ↗️ 42:06

  • Bailey reported that Kansas Department of Emergency Management would hold a virtual kickoff meeting on Friday at 9:00 AM regarding the May 19th storm damage, and that internet issues at the landfill had been resolved through collaboration between Stronghold and New Wave. ↗️ 45:48

  • Bailey addressed safety concerns at Public Works, presenting documentation of safety meetings, training records, and weekly tailgate sessions, emphasizing that safety is taken seriously despite recent characterizations in commission meetings. ↗️ 48:02

  • Dallas from Cloud Communications presented a phone system proposal costing approximately $30 per month per phone plus a one-time $150 per phone purchase, potentially saving money compared to the current system by eliminating server maintenance costs and providing additional features. ↗️ 01:01:05

  • The commission approved the formation of a planning commission by resolution, with Bob Johnson advising that a planning director position was not necessary at this time as the commission would primarily be making recommendations rather than implementing zoning. ↗️ 01:59:54

  • The commission approved the five-year solid waste plan committee consisting of the three commissioners, Dustin Hall from Public Works, and Joseph Smith. ↗️ 02:20:16

  • Commissioner Milburn reported that Stronghold Data had proposed a project to clean up the county’s computer system, update Windows 11 computers, and resolve ongoing issues in the Treasurer’s office, with a detailed document to be provided before the next meeting. ↗️ 02:23:49

  • Commissioner Beerbower proposed updating the county’s sanitation code from the 1998 version to align with KDHE’s 2023 standards, requesting a future work session to review changes with the current sanitation inspector. ↗️ 02:26:38

  • Commissioners discussed the challenges of balancing employee benefits with taxpayer burden, acknowledging that potential changes to the benefits structure may be necessary based on Budget Committee recommendations. ↗️ 02:36:54

Bourbon County Commission Employee Handbook Work Session Summary from Aug 4th, 2025

(Employee Handbook Review — Watch Full Video)

The Bourbon County Commissioners — Sam Tran, David Beerbower, and Mika — along with HR consultant Steve Cohen, met to review updates to the county employee handbook. Discussion centered on aligning policies with legal requirements, ensuring fairness for employees, and clarifying ambiguous language.

Major Decisions and Policy Updates

  • Clarifying Promises by Officials
    Commissioners agreed to specify that no promises or statements from supervisors, managers, or elected officials outside the commission constitute agreements with employees 06:56.

  • Terminology Update
    All references to “company” in the handbook will be replaced with “county” 08:51.

  • Harassment and Bullying Policies
    The harassment policy was kept with detailed procedures, and a new bullying policy was added 09:42.

  • Standards of Conduct
    Language was changed from “efforts to operate profitably” to “efforts to operate efficiently,” reflecting county priorities 10:35.

  • Firearms Policy Flagged for Review
    The section prohibiting firearms on county property was flagged for legal review due to questions about enforceability under Kansas law 11:02.

  • Expanded Disciplinary Process
    Commissioners voted to add a Personal Improvement Plan (PIP) and Corrective Action Plan between oral reminders and written warnings 14:13.

  • One-Year Introductory Period
    A 12-month probationary period for new employees was adopted, aligning with federal standards 18:18.

  • Work Schedules Set by Department
    Rather than standard hours, departments will set schedules, with a baseline of 40 hours per week 19:29.

  • Holiday Policy Review
    Holidays will be reviewed annually instead of guaranteeing specific days indefinitely. The list was expanded to include MLK Day, Washington’s Birthday, Good Friday, and Juneteenth 30:38.

  • Vacation Blackout Days Removed
    A proposed section restricting vacation around holidays and events (e.g., Thanksgiving, Valentine’s week, Super Bowl) was completely removed 31:54.

  • Vacation and Sick Leave Maintained
    The commission chose to retain current vacation and sick leave policies, with Steve tasked to incorporate the existing schedule 39:25.

  • Maternity and Paternity Leave
    The handbook will specify compliance with federal standards, allowing up to six weeks of unpaid leave 42:19.

  • Workers’ Compensation Language Updated
    References to Missouri law will be replaced with Kansas statutes, and OSHA applicability will be verified 44:01.

  • Dress Code Review
    Sam raised concerns that the dress code section was too vague 46:34. He noted the policy did not clearly address safety attire like steel-toed boots. Steve agreed to revise the section for greater clarity, ensuring workplace safety needs are explicitly covered.

  • Social Media and Public Communication
    Mika recommended replacing references to “county owners” with “county leaders” and “customers” with “taxpayers” to better reflect county operations and relationships with the public 47:29.

  • EMS Vacation Concerns
    EMS employees raised concerns that taking vacation reduces overtime pay. Commissioners discussed allowing the option to cash out unused vacation at year’s end to avoid financial loss 52:44.


Next Steps

  • Dr. Steve Cohen (HR Consultant) will integrate all approved edits into a revised draft of the handbook.

  • The current vacation and sick leave policy from the existing handbook will be imported directly into the new version.

  • Legal counsel (Bob) will review:

    • The enforceability of firearms restrictions on county property.

    • Whether OSHA documentation rules apply to the county.

  • The dress code section will be rewritten to clarify expectations, especially for roles requiring safety gear.

  • Social media policy will be updated to reflect language that acknowledges public service (e.g., changing “customers” to “taxpayers”).

  • The revised handbook draft will be shared with the commission and possibly the public, with changes clearly marked for comparison (Steve mentioned using a Google Docs revision format 48:08).

  • A future benefits committee may be formed or expanded to review leave, holidays, and compensation structure more broadly.

FortScott.biz Ads: Affordable, Local Audience, Friendly Setup

3 reasons Fort Scott businesses advertise with us

Wondering why local businesses trust FortScott.biz for their advertising? Here’s why:

  1. Affordable daily exposure
    $100/month puts you at the top of our daily email + boosts your posts on Facebook. Our reposts of advertisers FB posts alone is worth more than the cost.
  2. Reach the local audience that matters
    1,800+ email readers, 6,200+ Facebook followers — people right here in Bourbon County who need what you offer.
  3. Easy, friendly setup
    We help you craft your message and make sure you’re seen.

Click here to email us now!

We’d love to help your business grow!

— FortScott.biz

County Unable To Terminate Juvenile Detention Agreement with Girard Until 2027

In June, Sheriff Bill Martin, Under-sheriff Kevin Davidson, and Angie Eads, Director for the Sixth Judicial District Community Corrections, spoke with Commissioners Mika Milburn and David Beerbower about the possibility of saving the county money by changing their juvenile detention center provider.

During that meeting, Undersheriff Davidson stated that the county could have saved $50,000 in 2023 if it had switched to Johnson County’s program, and potentially more than $50,000 in 2024. County Clerk Susan Walker said the cost for the Girard program increased by $36,000 from 2024 to 2025 and noted that implementing the Sheriff’s suggestion would save money “right off the bat.”

Sheriff Martin had made a similar suggestion back in 2019 when the juvenile detention facility was charging a daily rate instead of the formula that is used today. That daily rate was $400+. The commissioners stated a concern that with changing laws, the alternatives might not remain in compliance and leaving the contract would make it impossible to rejoin.

At the June 23rd commission meeting, Mike Walden, director for the SEK Juvenile Detention Center in Girard came along with some administrators from the facility and some of the center’s board members to speak with the commission about the history of the center, anticipated changes in the law regarding the detention of juveniles, and the importance of Bourbon County continuing to use it as its juvenile detention resource.  The amount Bourbon County pays is based on the 4-year usage history and the assessed value/population of Bourbon County. (2023 formula shown here.)

SOUTHEAST KANSAS REGIONAL JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER / photo credit SKRJDC’s website

He pointed out that Bourbon County is a 1/10th owner of the facilities based on a previous investment of around $400,000. Ownership would be forfeited if Bourbon County chooses to cease using the facility.

Bourbon County Commissioner David Beerbower is a member of the Detention Center board, and Mr. Walden invited him to attend a board meeting to bring up any concerns about the pricing. He pointed out that no one from Bourbon County has come to a board meeting since 2022.

The June 23rd discussion seemed to end with a plan for Mr. Walen to reach out to Sheriff Martin and for the commissioners to ask the center’s board for a better agreement for Bourbon County.

At the July 21st commission meeting, it was noted that the county had missed the July 1 window to end the current contract for Juvenile Detention services with the Girard Juvenile Detention Center. The county is unable to change services until 2027.

Beerbower moved to terminate juvenile detention services with the Girard Juvenile Detention Center for the 2027 budget year. The motion passed unanimously.

Linn County had a similar discussion in the past, and it was pointed out that the Johnson County facility was full and needed to send juveniles elsewhere. The Girard facility said that their daily rate for non-members was going to be three times the normal per diem, which would have come to over $500 per person per day at the time.

Settlement Reached in Commissioner’s Lawsuit Against the County Commissioners

The unusual lawsuit that at one point had every sitting county commissioner listed as plaintiffs on a lawsuit against the county commission has apparently been settled. A filing at 4:08 today stated the following.

COME NOW the Parties, by and through their undersigned counsel of record, and hereby provide notice that a resolution of all remaining claims and theories was achieved and this case has been resolved

The filing doesn’t detail the terms of the settlement and goes on to say that both sides expect to have all the paperwork finished up in the next 60 days.

BB-2024-CV-000075 – Notice of Settlement.

Commissioner Beerbower’s Position on Zoning from 4/7/2025 Commission Meeting

At the commission meeting on April 7th, Commissioner Beerbower read a statement about zoning. FortScott.biz offered to run a copy of his written statement, but the written text was not provided.  Below is a transcript of his statement taken from the recording with only light editing to make it easier to read. The recording is the authoritative version and can be found here.

I would like to take a few minutes to speak about zoning.  I would like to clarify several statements I made last week. In last week’s announcement to a panel advisory board in reference to Bourbon County’s enacting of zoning regulations. Stating is not a matter of if we zone, but how we zone.  I have read the postings and comments on facebook, received phone calls, phone messages and texts, don’t start jumpin’, John, there were only four of ‘em.  I am a proponent of social media, and see it as a platform for practicing our first amendments rights. I encourage people to voice their opinions whether they are for or against, or on the fence about a subject. Communicating is a chief component to a compromise. No community of friends, family friends and neighbors will survive without compromise. Based on a few posts and comments, you would believe that zoning is a bad taboo. The reality is that the wrong people are using the negative stima, to further their personal agendas. Last week was, to say the least, very frustrating. I take the blame as I bumbled and stuttered my way through announcing our intent to enact zoning regulations on industrial development. The discussion of this agenda item turned into a free-for-all with too many people talking at once. Me included. At times this is a struggle as I become impatient and too eager to reply. Maybe the classroom rule of raising one’s  hand is needed.  

I welcome the public’s input on agenda items, but they should come at the end of the commissioners discussing them. I didn’t allow that to happen before I was finished presenting it. When people talk, listen completely. People, most people never listen. That’s Ernest Hemingway. Are we listening to what is being said, or are we just hearing what we believe we already know?  I did say three times, it was not a matter of if we were going towards zoning, rather what will zoning look like. Let me explain how I came to this belief that we are moving toward zoning. The issue of zoning is a touchy subject. But, in response to one of the facebook comments, it’s not just about solar. Solar became, because of our present circumstances, is at the top of the list as why this county needs to be zoned. 

All three commissioners, Krueger, Wisenhunt and I sworn in on January 13th, made zoning a part of our campaigns. Commissioner Krueger, prior to his resignation, took the lead on researching zoning regulations for the county to adopt. Chair, Chairman Wisenhunt, while serving in the previous commission, had asked Shane Walker to begin constructing a preliminary map established in all non incorporated areas as agricultural. Requiring any other industries to receive board of commissioner approval. This included discussion from both former commissioners, Clifton Beth and Jim Harris who recently reached out to me because they thought I had said the county staff had been assigned by the previous commission. They were not listening, or rather they were gossipers who told them or was not listening.  Nothing has changed with Beth, who just wanted to argue. Ironically, it was the actions, rather inactions, of these two former commissioners, that we are even having this discussion. 

After learning of the first set of solar agreements, signed November 13, 2023, without prior knowledge of the stakeholders, without any public notice of this industry’s intention to establish in Bourbon County, no public hearings, nothing total lack of transparency until the agreements were signed. This on the notion, that because of the county not being zoned, that landowners have total dominion over their property. Ignoring the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence, and the U.S.Constitution, and as affirmed by the United States Supreme court that sole dominion of one’s property comes with the responsibility not to interfere with their neighbor’s rights, to include not putting them at risk. This stance of no recourse was repeated to non-participating neighbors who came those the commissioners for help, after learning that  these huge solar sites, uh, panels numbering in the hundreds of thousands would be coming to a field near them. Only to hear from this board that only if citizens had been for zoning, uh, referring to a group that opposed the wind turbines, three years prior. Doubling down, stating they had no authority, because we are not zoned.  

Some of these sites would be near the neighboring houses, maybe even as close as twenty-five feet. A fun fact. I have not, I have heard of no participating landowner having panels close to their own homes. That’s point one of why I said it’s not a matter of if zoning is being implemented.  Point two, the former commission, who in their attempt to appease this growing group of neighbors, and a changing public opinion, requiring them to take action, uh, point two, is about, was about a temporary moratorium in the paneling of an advisory board. A zoning recommendation by this committee was ignored although the recommendations was never really conveyed by the committee leader. The committee members that were committed to finding solutions, had recommended zoning as a tool needed to regulate industries wanting to establish in Bourbon County. Point three, also from the previous commission, and this should clarify questions, uh, that I had received as to why voters are not deciding the zoning issue. From the first neighbor addressing this previous board, the issue of zoning was used as a stall tactic. Gathering a petition was a wild goose chase telling them it could be placed on the ballot this last election for voters to decide on zoning. Only to learn that zoning is not a ballot measure, but a commission action. It makes me wonder their intentions all along. Were they just in support of a few landowners? Funny, how now I’m hearing how this new commission is enacting zoning to support just a few disgrunted neighbors, disgruntled neighbors. 

We need to do what is right, and now we need to do what is right for the whole county. Ironically, this commission supports all stakeholders in this situation. The move to zoning, the pending litigation, neither is designed to stop this solar, these solar projects. What I have read on social media, viewed, in the past meetings and had one on one discussions, is that most people believe the negative statement about zoning. Landowners, farmers, and ranchers, especially generational families, are very passionate about their land. Protecting their land has been ingrained over decades from one generation to the next. Our mistrust in government is equally ingrained. This speech is a case study of how just a couple of members of government can divide a whole community. The purpose of government legislation is to preserve the health, safety and welfare of the people. Although this basic principle, that is lost in today’s political arena, I choose not to abandon it. 

Zoning is the practice of local governments to regulate land use through ordinance for the preservation and economic growth, while aiming to protect public health, safety and welfare. Zoning laws are tools used to control land development, minimizing risks, hazards, and reducing adverse effects to preservation and conservation of the land. Zoning is widely accepted and is firmly rooted in the U.S,. juris prudence. Zoning in the United States, dates back to the late 1800’s but became widely used in the early part of the twentieth century. Kansas adopted the Standard Zoning Enabling Act in 1924. This allowed for local governments to create and enforce their own zoning ordinances, regulating land use within their jurisdictions. Oddly, interestingly is that the concept of zoning follows the period in American history referred to as the second industrial revolution which saw widespread urbanization in to large cities like Los Angeles and New York, causing overcrowding and poor living and working conditions, pollution, and other health and safety concerns. 

Those that hold onto the out-dated ideology that zoning is somehow robs their freedom and right to do whatever they want on their land are short-sighted. The Homestead Act of 1862, which allowed homesteaders to purchase land from the Louisiana Purchase, including Kansas, had stipulations including the requirements to live on and cultivate the land for five years, build a home and make improvements before gaining full ownership. This was just the nuts and bolts of what the government was telling these future landowners to do. 

Just like the industrial revolution of the early 1900’s, saw urbanization in America drawn away from rural communities to bigger cities, today’s industrial development looks to invade rural areas not for manpower, but for the land. Let me reiterate. It is not a matter of if we will zone, it is a matter of what zoning will look like.  I believe zoning is a tool needed to help Bourbon County’s economic growth.

Thank you for listening this evening. I hope this gives a little more insight on this, on the issue of zoning in Bourbon County.  I invite you to submit letters of interest to me on the zoning advisory panel. Also, I encourage you to participate in an upcoming public hearing to further discuss this issue of zoning. Thank you.